Opinion: The R5 Mark II sounds cool – but where’s my Canon R5s?

[AlanF]

Good for you. I’m sure Canon will be heartbroken. Try this…get a calculator and divide 30K € by their annual camera revenue, which last year was over 5B €. That should give you a good sense of your importance. A lot of zeros.

View attachment 217019

Even worse, I'm only 1/8,112,086,189, and that was yesterday - even worse today as more are born.

 

[DSB]

Sounds like a great system, and you must be successful indeed to afford that new investment while keeping a full suite of Canon lenses for your R5. I'm sure you'll take some excellent images with the Fuji.

When you do, please feel free to come back here and post some of those images as comparisons with results from the R5, so we can all understand better the benefits you are getting with your new system. Looking forward to them.

I have a business, photography is what I do for a living and this will be a long term investment. 4 years ago I made an even larger investment when I switched to mirrorless and got the R5.

I can't say a bad thing about R5, it's truly a jack of all trades and has performed very well in all of the scenarios, both photograpy and video. Unfortunately the 45 megapixels has become limiting for my large prints, despite stitching to squeeze out more resolution. Also, the 400 mpix sensor shift mode is a joke. It never provided me with a usable result.

Considering that Fuji is now providing speed and focus performance similar to my previous 5DmkIV, while being 100 mpix and reasonably affordable, it's a no brainer. Especially now that it's obvious a high res Canon will not be coming for at least a few years, if not longer.

I'd never invest in Hasselblad or PhaseOne because those prices are out of my range and having tried them, I found them to be too slow, outdated and poorly built.

 

[DSB]

Forget about doing the math I suggested. Numbers aren’t your forte.

View attachment 217020

Posting global camera sales while we're discussing full frame mirrorless cameras is always a fanboy favorite!

In 7 years Sony has gone from not having a ILC to holding a third of MILC market. All the while Canon was snoozing at the helm.

It is a simple fact that Canon misjudged where the market was heading and that mirrorless is the future. If you would take off the fanboy glasses, you could see it as well.

 

[koenkooi]

Posting global camera sales while we're discussing full frame mirrorless cameras is always a fanboy favorite!

In 7 years Sony has gone from not having a ILC to holding a third of MILC market. All the while Canon was snoozing at the helm.

It is a simple fact that Canon misjudged where the market was heading and that mirrorless is the future. If you would take off the fanboy glasses, you could see it as well.

In 7 years Sony went from having 100% of the FF MILC market to having less than half of the market. They must be doing wrong when their market share has more than halved, right? And you're saying that they lost that while Canon was snoozing? Sony must be hoping Canon doesn't wake up properly!

 

[DSB]

In 7 years Sony went from having 100% of the FF MILC market to having less than half of the market. They must be doing wrong when their market share has more than halved, right? And you're saying that they lost that while Canon was snoozing? Sony must be hoping Canon doesn't wake up properly!

Turning facts upside down doesn't change them. Sony came out with mirrorless first, as a brand that had no professional photo camera offerings at all. Everyone else went following them. They literally pulled the rug under Canon, which was a full frame SLR leader for 20 years.

In the very short timeframe Sony has churned out so many new bodies and lenses they're now consistently in the top 3 camera manufacturers. That's a classic market disruptor performance. Fuji is a disruptor as well - they're hitting both ways, against FF MILC and oldschool medium format. And with great success, just like Sony did. To me, it seems Canon is snoozing once again because they still don't have a camera offering with more than 45 megapixels.

I've been a loyal Canon user for well over 20 years, my first dslr was a Canon and I've had more than 10 Canon bodies during that time, everything from the D30 to multiple series 1 cameras. People here seem to be very hostile to anyone voicing opposing views when it comes to Canon, but I'm speaking because I want Canon to do better.

 

[Loswr]

You must be pretty heartbroken. You never fail to point out that Canon is still making money when a forum member is dissatisfied with them.
For me personally it is more important that a product meets my needs and helps me make money. Otherwise I would just donate to the company with largest revenue.

You can be as dissatisfied as you want. I have never suggested anyone should make a buying decision based on which brand sells more cameras, if I did so then I’d be as idiotic as those who believe their personal buying decisions matter to Canon.

By the way, you should read more carefully or work on comprehension. I don’t bring up sales metrics when people express dissatisfaction with Canon. I bring those data up when people state or imply that their dissatisfaction has meaningful consequences for Canon.

“I wish Canon would make a high MP camera.”

vs.

“Canon’s failure to make a high MP camera spells doom for them, it’s why they’re so far behind Sony so I’m taking my 30,000 marbles and going to play with someone else’s camera.”

I trust that even someone with poor reading comprehension skills can grasp that one of those is a reasonable expression of personal desire, and the other is petulant, irrelevant whining.

 

[Loswr]

In 7 years Sony went from having 100% of the FF MILC market to having less than half of the market. They must be doing wrong when their market share has more than halved, right? And you're saying that they lost that while Canon was snoozing? Sony must be hoping Canon doesn't wake up properly!

A fool and his money may soon be parted, but a fool and the opinions he believes are facts are more difficult to separate.

 

[YuengLinger]

About the lenses: Youtuber Chris Frost, a channel which does lens reviews, has a habit of (re)testing different types of both EF and RF full frame lenses with a test chart with an R7 which off-course is the camera with the highest of megapixels per sensor area in the RF system. While the high end primes typically cope well the L series zoom lenses show more mixed result. Off-course any high resolution sensor will achieve better resolving. But if many lenses still limit that potential, and other trade-off also come with such a sensor I get it why this might not be on top of Canon's priority list. Maybe they also first want to further develop the RF system like the EF system, have some mark II versions of some current L series lenses on te market, before releasing such a camera.

Could you give some specific examples of "mixed results"? This is an interesting point, but I'd rather not have to wade through all the videos to find these results. Thank you.

 

[Richard CR]

Turning facts upside down doesn't change them. Sony came out with mirrorless first, as a brand that had no professional photo camera offerings at all. Everyone else went following them. They literally pulled the rug under Canon, which was a full frame SLR leader for 20 years.

In the very short timeframe Sony has churned out so many new bodies and lenses they're now consistently in the top 3 camera manufacturers. That's a classic market disruptor performance. Fuji is a disruptor as well - they're hitting both ways, against FF MILC and oldschool medium format. And with great success, just like Sony did. To me, it seems Canon is snoozing once again because they still don't have a camera offering with more than 45 megapixels.

While I agree with you that Canon does need a higher resolution camera body. Canon does tend to listen to market forces.

Most times through the history of digital it's been Canon that has pushed the megapixel race forward to new heights.

Just to clarify your Sony part though - Sony went mirrorless because they couldn't handle the competition with their Minolta lineup. Canon moved to mirrorless (as did Nikon) not because of Sony, but because Canon got to a point with DPAF that it made sense to do so.

Remember that Canon developed DPAF in 2013, nearly 11 years ago, meaning they were actually working on it around 2010-11, which also included significant updates to the fabrication lines in Canon's own semiconductor plants.

No one waited for Sony to go full frame and disrupt the market - Canon could see this way forward well before then.

 

[Loswr]

Turning facts upside down doesn't change them. Sony came out with mirrorless first, as a brand that had no professional photo camera offerings at all. Everyone else went following them. They literally pulled the rug under Canon, which was a full frame SLR leader for 20 years.

Did Sony shift their focus to MILCs because the were so technologically innovative, or because of their inability to compete with Canon and Nikon DLSRs? Hint: a few years after moving into MILCs, they abandoned the DSLR market. DSLRs continued to outsell MILCs for many years. It was not until after Canon fully committed to MILCs with both FF and APS-C offerings that MILCs finally began outselling DSLRs. You probably think that's a coincidence.

Did Sony shift their focus to full frame MILCs because more customers wanted FF, or because Canon launched the EOS M line? The EOS M line went on to become the #1-selling MILC line, at its peak ~17% of all cameras sold had an EOS M badge.

Funny how 'the rug was pulled from under Canon' and then Canon went on to become the mirrorless market leader. I know, you only want to talk about full frame. As was pointed out, Sony has lost half their FF MILC market share, mainly to Canon. If you look beyond a one-year window, the installed base of FF cameras remains a solid Canon majority.

People here seem to be very hostile to anyone voicing opposing views when it comes to Canon, but I'm speaking because I want Canon to do better.

No, you are speaking because you want Canon to make the camera that you think is better. News flash, you don't get to define 'better' for anyone else.

 

[DSB]

“Canon’s failure to make a high MP camera spells doom for them, it’s why they’re so far behind Sony so I’m taking my 30,000 marbles and going to play with someone else’s camera.”

I trust that even someone with poor reading comprehension skills can grasp that one of those is a reasonable expression of personal desire, and the other is petulant, irrelevant whining.

Why do you keep lying I said something I didn't? You are continuously trying to put words in my mouth. I shared my opinion on the latest Canon offerings, along with my further decisions based on those offerings.

I do not expect my decision to impact Canon or Canon's decisions in any way. I'm simply stating that I'm going with Fuji for a very concise and clear set of reasons.

You seem to be taking criticism aimed at Canon very personally. Perhaps you need to realize Canon doesn't care about your fanboyism either.

 

[Loswr]

Why do you keep lying I said something I didn't? You are continuously trying to put words in my mouth.

Sure, you never suggested Canon was in trouble for any reason.

I was disappointed it won't be getting a high resolution sensor. This seems to be Canons Achilles heel atm.

And let's not forget:

So, that's a cool 30.000+ € that I'll be investing into Fuji... It could've gone to Canon...

Maybe you meant that as a simple statement of fact (assuming you follow through). But it seems the implication is that Canon is missing out and that it matters more than, for example, whether or not it's raining on your house right now or not. The reality is that neither is relevant to Canon. Nor is the fact that I've spend more than that on Canon equipment.

I shared my opinion on the latest Canon offerings, along with my further decisions based on those offerings.

Yes...opinions like:

It is a simple fact that Canon misjudged where the market was heading and that mirrorless is the future.

Clearly, you would not know a fact if it bit you on the butt. Canon misjudged so badly that they took leadership of the MILC market away from Sony, compounding the misjudgments that have resulted in Canon leading the ILC market for over two decades, and as they've done without meaningful loss of market share even as the ILC market plummeted and as it subsequently transitioned to mirrorless. Get a dictionary and look up both "fact" and "misjudgment". You keep using those words, I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

 

[DSB]

Sure...

I now see you're taking my criticism of Canon deeply personally. I'm sorry I've made you upset by saying I didn't like the direction a corporation is going in as well as explaining why. I'll try not to voice my personal opinions, as that priviledge is clearly reserved only for you.

 

[Loswr]

I now see you're taking my criticism of Canon deeply personally. I'm sorry I've made you upset by saying I didn't like the direction a corporation is going in as well as explaining why. I'll try not to voice my personal opinions, as that priviledge is clearly reserved only for you.

Not sure how many times it must be said. People are entitled to their own opinions, not to their own facts. Of course, I’d doesn’t help when people can’t distinguish the two.

 

[DSB]

Not sure how many times it must be said. People are entitled to their own opinions, not to their own facts. Of course, I’d doesn’t help when people can’t distinguish the two.

Of course, that's why you started attacking and mocking me as soon as I simply stated I will be investing in another brand... But let's pretend like that didn't happen!

Make sure to kiss your Canon tonight, tell him a bad man online said something negative, but he's a big boy and no one needs more than 45 megapixels!

 

[Loswr]

Of course, that's why you started attacking and mocking me as soon as I simply stated I will be investing in another brand... But let's pretend like that didn't happen!

Make sure to kiss your Canon tonight, tell him a bad man online said something negative, but he's a big boy and no one needs more than 45 megapixels!

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

 

[DhlcadR6]

That is a long list of assumptions you've made there. Burst speeds and autofocus mean very little to me, since I mostly shoot manual tilt shift lenses and do architecture and landscapes.

I print. Very. Large. Formats. Huge ones actually. I've sold multiple photo wallpapers just this year, not to mention many framed prints. If I'm printing a 40 ft wide photo wallpaper for a public space, then I really DO need those megapixels because people will come up to them and see the image quality - not just me on 400% zoom. Just the other day I completed editing on a 27 gigabyte photo that has a 130,000 pixel width and can be printed at 300 dpi to 30 feet wide.

I can't remember the last time I needed 1/4000s shutter speed.

Finally, it's not just the resolution, but also the dynamic range. While the R5 was a big step forward compared to 5D series cameras, it's still behind the medium format.

Because I will adapt some of my Canon TSE lenses, I will also profit from the extra width of the medium format frame, meaning I won't have to stitch as often as I do now.

And finally, I will still keep my Canon R5 and a full set of lenses; might even get the R5mkII as a backup and as a video camera for the shorts and reels that I occasionally do for my clients. But instead of pouring more money into a Canon system, I will be adding the Fuji GFX - not because I want to, but because Canon doesn't have and will not have for god knows how many years, a sensor that I need.

If AF isn't your priority, you should give Hassel's X1D a look....imho it's better than Fuji

 

[DSB]

I did consider X2D 100C, but Hasselblad doesn't have native tilt shift lenses and I'm not very keen to give up focus recognition. Also, Hasselblad is much slower in general and has a lower resolution viewfinder.

One big advantage for Hassel is the leaf shutter, but that's not enough to win me over. Did I miss any other pluses for X2D?

 

[RikC]

Could you give some specific examples of "mixed results"? This is an interesting point, but I'd rather not have to wade through all the videos to find these results. Thank you.

Generally, the more recent 're-review' videos in the 'Canon lens playlist' contain the testing with an R5 and R7.

Canon Lens Reviews

Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

youtube.com

For example the 28-70 f/2 L. An epic lens although one which even appears to have some problems coping with the R7's very high resolution per sensor area:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be

 

[koenkooi]

Generally, the more recent 're-review' videos in the 'Canon lens playlist' contain the testing with an R5 and R7.

Canon Lens Reviews

Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

youtube.com

For example the 28-70 f/2 L. An epic lens although one which even appears to have some problems coping with the R7's very high resolution per sensor area:

- YouTube

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

youtu.be

The 28-70 re-review is a bit controversial, various people on the interwebs have stated, without showing pictures, that they have much better results with the 28-70 and R5/R7.
I personally was happy with its IQ on the R5 when I rented it, but I'm also happy with the IQ of the RF24-105L